Posted: 11/13/2011 7:26:49 AM EDT
| I have always used fixed magnification scopes for stalking, which for me has been relatively close range roe in and on the edges of woodland where my current 8 x 50 is ideal. My target rifles have second focal plane scopes, in which the size of the reticule remains constant at all magnifications. I have an option on an older but still very nice Schmidt & Bender 4 - 14 x 40 which is first focal plane, i.e. the reticule enlarges with the image so the image/reticule relationship is constant. If I go for it, it will go onto my Tikka 6.5x55 Swedish with which I intend to get out onto the hills for some reds next year, the higher magnification is for the longer ranges I expect. I have heard criticism of this style of scope, the reticule is thought by some to become too big and is likened to looking through gateposts, although looking through this one I don't find it too bad. Does anyone use first focal plane (particularly for stalking), what are your views and opinions chaps? |
| Used a Meopta meostar on my T3 in 6.5x55 for a while before swapping it onto a fox rifle. It's FFP too and I never had a problem with it at all. In fact, once I pick up another Meopta, it'll go back on the T3. Never had an issue with the ret obscuring roe, in fact I found it easier to pick up in low light. Good choice IMHO... |
|
Generally speaking, you only need first focal plane if you are using the reticle or subtensions on it for rangefinding. Or for measuring holdover at differing ranges.
Otherwise most would say that second focal plane is better. I have a first focal plane on my S+B for target shooting but went for a second focal plane on the Zeiss I just picked up for stalking. |
|
I have a first focal on my schmidt on my stalking rifle.
It is a very fine reticle, but to be honest, unless it is the really chunky schmidt cross hair, I don't think you will have a problem at 14 mag. Mine is a 3-12 and I don't find it at all a problem, generally when I am zooming in it is because I have seen something worth shooting so my mind might be on other things, but that said, I think I would remember if I was particularly frustrated with the reticle. If you are based near me you are welcome to come and have a look through it to get a feel for the size of the problem 
|
|
Quoted:
I can't seem to get on with FFP. I was put off by a Pecar that had a post reticle that was wider than a Fig. 11 at 300yds. Not good when you're shooting them out to 600yds.. Yes, I understand your point. That would not be ideal, it's always a help if you can see your target. 
|
|
hello mate - i'm new to this forum, but couldn't resist in replying...
I love FFP and have a 'lightsteam 4.5-14x44' and is good vale for money i think. I use it a lot for hunting and would highly recommend one for .22lr - but i guess if you are using a faster round, then you may not need to rely on the mildots not shifting when you zoom in or out, for such a 'loopy' trajectory? (if you know what i mean). ATB Jon |
|
Quoted:
hello mate - i'm new to this forum, but couldn't resist in replying... I love FFP and have a 'lightsteam 4.5-14x44' and is good vale for money i think. I use it a lot for hunting and would highly recommend one for .22lr - but i guess if you are using a faster round, then you may not need to rely on the mildots not shifting when you zoom in or out, for such a 'loopy' trajectory? (if you know what i mean). ATB Jon WTF?
|
|
Quoted:
hello mate - i'm new to this forum, but couldn't resist in replying... I love FFP and have a 'lightsteam 4.5-14x44' and is good vale for money i think. I use it a lot for hunting and would highly recommend one for .22lr - but i guess if you are using a faster round, then you may not need to rely on the mildots not shifting when you zoom in or out, for such a 'loopy' trajectory? (if you know what i mean). ATB Jon Jon Shooters on here mainly use full bore for competition. Out to 600+ yards. CSR is shot with fullbore, max 4.5 magnification. Practical Rifle, again full bore with variable power. .22LR comparisons are really not in the same ballpark in terms of ballistics. Get yourself a .223 AR15 Straight pull and go along to a CSR or PR match. Even if you haven't got a rifle get yourself down to a match and stay for the day, work butts and get to see what we do. You'll learn an awful lot and see what we are talking about first hand. I can highly reccomend seeing it first hand. Contact me or Bradders if you want to come down to a match and well give you the info you need. You are entering a whole new ballgame when you start shooting PR/CSR. |
|
Quoted:
hello mate - i'm new to this forum, but couldn't resist in replying... I love FFP and have a 'lightsteam 4.5-14x44' and is good vale for money i think. I use it a lot for hunting and would highly recommend one for .22lr - but i guess if you are using a faster round, then you may not need to rely on the mildots not shifting when you zoom in or out, for such a 'loopy' trajectory? (if you know what i mean). ATB Jon Jon, Thanks for the input but as I mentioned in my first post I am seeking opinions about a scope for a deer stalking rifle, specifically 6.5x55 Swedish, rather faster and flatter shooting than a .22lr. I would not consider a mildot reticule in FFP. |
|
Ok, just to put my post into perspective, and since I live at the opposite end of the country to the OP. I have taken a couple of photos. Hopefully they will show the increase in size of the reticle.
My reticle is the (P-1)Bryant reticle, which is probably not your average stalking reticle. That said, from this link: http://www.schmidtbender.com/reticlesstandard.htm there are only a few that I would say might be excessively large for deer on higher mags. Reticles 1 and 9. I had another Schmidt with a reticle similar to No. 4 and had no problems with that at 10X. Anyway, pics below, first the scope on 3X mag, looking at a wall about 2 metres in front of the scope: 
Then 12X mag looking at the same wall: 
Hopefully that helps a bit to imagine the size increase! |
|
Quoted:
Ok, just to put my post into perspective, and since I live at the opposite end of the country to the OP. I have taken a couple of photos. Hopefully they will show the increase in size of the reticule. My reticle is the (P-1)Bryant reticle, which is probably not your average stalking reticle. That said, from this link: http://www.schmidtbender.com/reticlesstandard.htm there are only a few that I would say might be excessively large for deer on higher mags. Reticles 1 and 9. I had another Schmidt with a reticle similar to No. 4 and had no problems with that at 10X. Anyway, pics below, first the scope on 3X mag, looking at a wall about 2 metres in front of the scope: http://www.rarms.free-online.co.uk/3x.jpg Then 12X mag looking at the same wall: http://www.rarms.free-online.co.uk/12x.jpg Hopefully that helps a bit to imagine the size increase! Thanks for the photos, they illustrate the question quite well. The S & B I mentioned in the original post has a No 7 S & B (Swarovski call it a 4A) reticule so there is a sizable extent of thinner reticule in the centre of the field of view so the target should not be obscured to any significant extent. I am coming round to the concept of FFP the more I see of it. I was dismissive of the idea of a FFP mildot because I thought the reticule would be very intrusive, but I saw today that there is a Leopold to this design. They point out what I had not realised, the mildot ranging will work at any magnification which will be pretty good. |
|
I've got the S&B with No.7 illuminated reticule on my stalking rifle, FFP is a pain when the reticule is unusable either because it's too fine when zoomed out or too thick when zoomed in, but I've not found that to be a problem, but then again the scope stays on 7-8x and cranked up when a closer look is required. If you can't see the reticule, it's probably dark so just turn on the illumination.
For my 308 running 150 grain bullets @~2700 fps: In theory with a 200 yard zero, the top of the cross is a good 100 yard zero and the bottom should be pretty close for 300 yards, but then for stalking who gives a shit, you don't usually have time to dick about, just shoot - deer kill zone is massive. |
|
... I was dismissive of the idea of a FFP mildot because I thought the reticule would be very intrusive, but I saw today that there is a Leopold to this design. They point out what I had not realised, the mildot ranging will work at any magnification which will be pretty good.[/quote]
I have surely missed something. While FFP undoudtedly started as a European optics thing its most recognised benefit is that you can range when on any magnification setting as opposed to an SFP scope where this is only true at one magnification setting. If you think you want to use the relationship of the reticles for ranging then get one. For deer you won't be at lowest mag so the ret being too small won't be an issue. Similarly I doubt you will be using top mag either and so having the ret obscure your desired point of aim is also not an issue. The guys I know who stalk regularly mostly go for fixed 6 power, 8 power or similar and just go for the best quality glass so as to make most use of daylight. They also mostly go for a simple cross or post type reticle because simple always works. Some favour the duplex reticle which can be used to range when shooting deer or similar game if you know what you are doing. Anyway there is plenty on the Internet on all of the above. Personally if I was looking for a scope to use for deer stalking with a 6.5 I would go for either a fixed 6 or 8 power scope with a post and fine cross hair or a duplex reticle. Failing that I would go for a good quality 3-9 power scope with same reticles. |